Hi Paul
General question for you.
What are the three or four major problem areas preventing the rotary
from really catching on as THE solution for general aviation. Cooling
? Optimal reduction unit ? lubrication ? ignition ? etc ?
These are pretty elemental questions I'm not sure would interest
everyone but I am interested to see where you think the advances need
to be made and
where the weaknesses are.
Thanks
Bill
Education, education and education :)
I still have people asking me; "what about the apex seals?"
The apex seal problem was solved 40 years ago.
In 1973 Mazda had problem with neoprene water
sealing O-rings. They melted when the engine was over heated.
It was dumb on the part of Mazda to use neoprene in the first place.
The problem was widely publicized. The only thing people remembered
was the word "sealing". Consequently people still think apex seals
are a problem.
Pilots are all from Missouri. It is a show me situation.
Until we have dozens of aircraft showing up at Sun & Fun and OSH the
rotary will never take off en mass.
In the mean time it is fuel plumbing details, cooling system design
and cooling plumbing details that give the builders the most trouble.
As far as new converts are concerned they want to see substantial
advantges. Higher HP per pound of engine weight is one of those
advantages. In that regard more people using p-ports will help.
Paul Lamar
Paul,
Efficient cooling system design and detail is the number one problem
I've seen on the lists, followed closely by fuel consumption. Another
item I've seen mentioned often as a sore spot is the lack of PSRU's
designed to use hydraulic CS props. Mistral has one, but they're the
only one I've heard of. Everything else uses fixed pitch or $$$
electric CS.
Another part of the problem, as I see it, is that of trying to retro-fit
the package (engine, cooling system, etc.) into airframes that were
designed for air-cooled engines, resulting in less-than-efficient,
less-than-elegant solutions. Tracy Crook's done a wonderful job, but
even he will admit that his cooling design isn't the most efficient.
Same for Powersport...there just isn't a whole lot of room up front for
all this stuff! The best solution to all of the problems might be as
simple (and as complex) as designing an airframe specifically around the
rotary package (making it aerodynamically clean, well engineered, simple
to build, affordable, sexy, etc. is the complex part).
Michael White
a.k.a. "Moose"
You must remember that the rotary burns auto gas which is a 40 to 50
cent a gallon advantage over 100LL right there. 20% less cost. The Mazda
is only 1 or 2% worse than a Lycoming in terms of gallons per hour.
I place fuel plumbing ahead of cooling system design as it will kill you
faster.
If your careful and plan ahead no problem getting the cooling system
under the
cowl. Most Mazda engine builders flying today are making at least one
serious
mistake. Many of them several. The most common is trying to use the
cowl surface
as part of the duct.
Chuck Dunlap is flying out of Arizona no less and he is complaining
about running too cool. He flies to Sun & Fun and OSH just about
every year. Careful duct design and perfect sealing between duct and rad
pays off big time.
Check out the latest version of How to Cool Your Wankel
http://www.rotaryeng.net/how-to-cool12.html
I have been updating it almost daily. Eventually it will be published as
a book.
Paul Lamar
Is there a picture of Mr. Dunlap's cooling setup posted somewhere?
Matt-
Did you not get those three pictures I just uploaded Matt?
I have a lot more but I don't think Chuck has a web site.
Paul Lamar
The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2005 All world wide rights reserved.